It was a big week for television: Osama bin Laden, currently Numero Uno monster on our Hit Parade list, sharing prime time with our first-rate warriors in and over Afghanistan.

First, the video marathon of OBL and his gleeful pals sitting around on pillows, hugging, kissing, high-fiving and hissing. You know, the Top Ten Tape where weird-looking cats are speaking in tongues, sipping tea, sharing nightmares and praising Allah for what a neat job their gang of goons pulled off murdering thousands of innocent noncombatants whose big worry before Sept. 11 was lunch. For those of the Greatest Generation, it must have been like watching a 1940 movie of Adolf Hitler cheerily extolling the efficiency of his latest-model oven.

The tube kept flicking from OBL gloating with his groupies to maneuvers in Afghanistan that would have to be the most eclectic military operations in history: mobs of primitive warriors with horses, mules and junkyard pickup trucks at the bomb craters of Tora Bora looking as soldierly as Ringling Bros. circus clowns, being supported by the most sophisticated weaponry warfare has ever known.

Good intelligence sources say OBL has vowed never to be taken alive. The word is, "He'll self-vaporize" as we're about to grab him. If that's the scenario, be prepared for rumors galore and OBL sightings well into the next century, kind of like what happened with Elvis. Of course, there'll also be the T-shirt – Osama at the Eternal Oasis.

But no matter what goes down with OBL, all proclamations of victory will only make these twisted terrorists – who've been programmed to hate us since they were training in demolition diapers – even more determined to do their evil thing. Their loathing of us won't disappear in clouds of bomb dust.

Watching the tape only reinforced my conviction that we need to wipe out OBL's worldwide al-Qaeda network along with the rest of the terrorists from Algeria to Zambia. It's clear that these zealots from hell are all hustling hard for the big bang. And once they get the lethal chemicals, the bugs and nuke bombs in their hands, bet on them being used.

Speed is of the essence here – either we close these monsters down, or we get closed down by them. For centuries, if not forever.

There are more than 60 states around the globe that currently provide support and sanctuary to terrorists. In some places, like Afghanistan and Iraq, we'll need to use a lot of military muscle, while in others, like the Philippines, where there are competent, reliable friendlies, we'll only need to provide advisers, intelligence info and resources.

The key to this long-term global campaign is to get in, do the job, then get out fast. In Afghanistan, for example, once we've terminated OBL's gang, we need to get our military out ASAP.

I worry about our Marines now defending the Kandahar airport. Lebanon in 1983, when 242 Marines and sailors were killed by a truck bomb while sitting like ducks on a dumb mission, keeps coming to mind. Or how our Rangers were sucked into an ambush in Somalia in 1993, losing 18 good men because overeager COs went for the bait. Have no doubt that there are Taliban fanatics in Afghanistan standing in line for just such a ticket to punk Paradise. Once that airport is running and U.N. troops arrive, they must free up our Marines to move on to the next objective.

Another reason for splitting Afghanistan just as soon as our military objectives – taking out the Taliban and Al-Qaeda leadership and military – are reached is that the country's become one big minefield. There are more than 10 million mines scattered across that war-ravaged land, vicious weapons that have already drawn Marine blood in Kandahar and accounted for one-third of our casualties in Vietnam. And then there's the problem identifying the bad guys when almost every male packs an AK-47 and changes sides as fast as he can change his turban.

The longer we stay in a hot spot, the more we're asking for trouble. No question that whoever's set on replacing OBL will try to make his bones by taking American warriors out. We must not overstay our unwelcome.

http://www.hackworth.com is the address of David Hackworth's home page. Sign in for the free weekly Defending America column at his Web site. Send mail to P.O. Box 11179, Greenwich, CT 06831.

Table of Contents

ARTICLE 01 – Islam Responds to the Bin Laden Tape

By Robert G. Williscroft

By now, anyone remotely interested has viewed and listened to the video tape of Osama bin Laden discussing the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attack on the World Trade Center with a Saudi named Khaled al-Harbi, identified as a former anti-Soviet fighter in Afghanistan who was stripped of his Saudi citizenship in 1994 for attempts to organize opposition to the monarchy. (Initial news reports erroneously identified him as Sheikh Ali bin Said al-Ghandi, a Saudi Arabian cleric known for extreme anti-western views).

Nevertheless, it is interesting to review reactions to this tape compiled from Reuters and Associated Press reports from various elements of the Islamic world community.

Following the video's release, several Palestinian men at a coffee shop in East Jerusalem were asked about the tape. Most said they had seen it on Arabic satellite television channel Al-Jazeera, but none believed bin Laden was guilty.

"If I, Abdullah, am saying I am going to attack the United States; if I am saying that, does that mean I am going to do it?'" asked Abdullah Alkam. "I don't think bin Laden was responsible for this attack." They considered the video U.S. propaganda to justify the war in Afghanistan. "Anyone who opposes them, who tries to implement Islam, is a terrorist," said another man.

Abu Johara, a Jerusalem jeweler who acknowledged seeing the video, commented: "I can't say or judge that bin Laden was responsible."

In Cairo, Mohamed al-Amir al-Sayed Awad Atta, Egyptian father of the suspected hijacker Mohammed Atta, dismissed the video as a farce. "The whole world has been saying this name [Mohammed Atta]. Where did bin Laden get the name from? Bin Laden got it from America. All this is a forgery, a fabrication," he said.

Investigators believe Mohammed Atta personally crashed American Airlines Flight 11 into the World Trade Center, and that he was the ringleader behind the four hijacking teams.

Cairo advertising agent Munir Salem charged, "It's a Hollywood farce. They have studios which can simulate earthquakes and all sorts of special effects so nothing would stop them from finding a bin Laden double."

Egyptian architect Hend al-Alfi asked, "If they can make a film with an actor shaking the hand of the American president, what prevents them from using such special effects to fake a video?" He then added, "Even the inaudible parts were done deliberately to give it an authentic flavor."

Amr Abdel Mohsen, a political science student at the University of Cairo, said, "The Americans lie as easily as they breathe. They had promised a Palestinian state and now they bless Israel's destruction of Palestinian land, so to fabricate a cassette is nothing."

Egyptian militant defense lawyer Muntasser al-Zayyat accused the United States of launching an onslaught on Afghanistan without proof of Osama's responsibility. He said, "[The tape] shows that the United States had no evidence whatsoever when it blamed bin Laden hours after the September 11 attacks, and when it launched its air raids on Afghanistan on October 7, killing people and destroying homes."

"Tell me something," said former Pakistani intelligence chief Gen. Hamid Gul. "Osama has been denying he did the job, and then he conveniently has himself recorded and leaves the tape behind in a house? Come on … in this high-tech world, a look-alike of Osama can be made to say and do anything."

Pakistani writer Ameena Khan said, "This is all just an American game, a negative media portrayal against Osama. This tape doesn't convince me."

Abdullah Omar Abdel Rahman, whose brother, Ahmed Omar, was seized last month in Afghanistan as a suspected leader of Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda network believes the United States " … has the technology to forge a videotape of this kind." He said, "In openly admitting his involvement, bin Laden is contradicting himself, as he has always blessed attacks, but has never explicitly claimed them." Their father is Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind Islamic cleric sentenced in 1995 to life in prison for a foiled plot to bomb several New York landmarks.

Muhammad Rizieq leader of the radical Indonesian Islamic Defenders Front: "I am sick with its [U.S.] propaganda to cover up their war crimes in Afghanistan. You know Americans have all the technology. Making up a videotape is so easy for them." Hasyim Muzadi, who heads the more moderate 40 million member Indonesian group Nahdlatul Ulama, commented, "Is Osama the culprit? It still looks rather doubtful, doesn't it?" Malaysia Muslim opposition party members dismissed the tape as a fake.

Even Chechen fighters questioned the tape's authenticity on their kavkaz.org website, saying that it raised more questions than answers. "The quality of the tape was quite bad. Modern technology makes it possible to alter any taped sound."

There were some positive responses to the bin Laden video from the Muslim world, primarily from within the United States and Pakistan, and there were even some "I've changed my mind" responses, but the overwhelming Islamic reaction was outright rejection.

The collective world of Islam prayed urgently to heaven: Great Allah, in your utmost goodness and mercy, grant that no fact, convincing though it may be, even when proven beyond doubt, grant that no fact will sway our considered opinion.

Robert G. Williscroft is DefenseWatch Navy Editor. He can be reached at dwnavyeditor@argee.net

Table of Contents

ARTICLE 02 – Ten Things I Do Not Know Or Understand

By Matthew Dodd

The famous satirist Will Rogers once observed, "Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects." Many people do not like to admit ignorance, but it is tough to argue with Rogers' quote. From my experience as a military officer, the consensus is that folks who come across as "know-it-alls" are not trusted and not well respected.

Today's military leaders would do themselves, and their seniors and subordinates, a great service if they took the time to reflect on the things they do not know or understand. To better facilitate discussion and reflection, let me share with you my current "Top 10" list of subjects on which I freely confess my ignorance:

10. How can American John Walker, who was captured with an AK-47 strapped across his shoulders as a trained Taliban fighter against U.S. and allied forces in

Afghanistan, be considered as anything but a traitor to our nation?

9. Why are so many active and reserve component folks who love the military and who have dedicated their lives to serving their country so fearful of retribution for identifying institutional faults, failures, and falsehoods that they choose to remain silent?

8. Who originated the observation that the military services are known as the "Four Ds: the Dumb, the Devious, the Defiant, the Dedicated?" (I will leave it to you to figure out which service belongs to which "D").

7. Why does most everyone complain about poor or no turnovers when starting new jobs, but hardly anybody takes the time or makes the effort to write accurate desktop procedures/turnover binders/continuity files, etc.?

6. How does the Pentagon Joint Staff expect to succeed in developing future warfighting concepts by designating lone O-6s to lead long-term, part-time, and ad hoc working groups to study and write those concepts?

5. How can some Joint Staff general/flag officers unabashedly say that they are willingly seeking only the 75 percent solution now, knowing full well that the issue will need to be worked again in the future (on someone else's watch) to get to the 100 percent solution?

4. Why do so many retired general/flag officers encourage active junior officers to exercise their moral courage by speaking out against legacy problems, programs, and policies that those same retired general/flag officers either endorsed, ignored, or failed to change when they were on active duty?

3. Why did it take the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to prompt a major mainstream newspaper (USA Today, “Misconduct Marks Guard Command: Lack of oversight by Pentagon, states let misbehavior flourish”) that captures what David Hackworth and his readers have been saying for years about widespread corruption in the National Guard?

2. Why is it that nobody seems to consider the idea of military and governmental seniors seeking and accepting feedback and constructive criticism from subordinates

as a leadership development tool (promotion consideration)?

1. Why is it that our military leadership, which is doing a superb job in our global war on terrorism, is powerless to stop, or at least contain, the proliferation of “Power-Point Rangers?”

I believe in the words of the enormously popular philosopher, “Anonymous,” who once said, "Admission of ignorance is the beginning of wisdom." Now that I have willingly admitted my ignorance, I am feeling more liberated than wise. I guess only time will tell.

Lt. Col. Matthew Dodd is the pen name of an active-duty Marine Corps officer stationed at the Pentagon. He can be reached at mattdodd1775@hotmail.com.

Table of Contents

ARTICLE 03 – Scary Airport Security

As a Marine recruiter, I took a few new recruits to the Memphis Airport and saw something that scared me: Army National Guard soldiers on duty.

Here’s the scary part. Army National Guardsmen generally receive less training than most warriors, but the young, under-trained Guardsmen I saw were carrying

M-16s loaded with the standard NATO spec ammo which carries the ss109 bullet known as the penetrator (light armor-piercing) which will not only zip through one person but several.

Moreover, they were carrying them at sling arms, where anyone with any type of sentry take-down training can get hold of the rifle. This was the wrong weapon, the wrong ammunition, and most likely insufficient training for that environment.

I do know of Guardsmen who could handle that weapon in that environment, but they are very far and few between.

--A Concerned Marine

Table of Contents

ARTICLE 04 – For the Record: Afghanistan Service Personnel Get Tax Break

Editor’s Note: Two says after Col. David Hackworth called on the Bush administration to grant military service personnel in the Afghanistan war zone the traditional income tax break, the White House and Pentagon responded positively.

Text of the Defense Department News Release, Dec. 14, 2001:

COMBAT ZONE TAX BREAK ANNOUNCED

Servicemembers in Afghanistan will receive significant tax breaks as a result of an executive order signed today by the president.

The order is effective Sept. 19, the day troops first started deploying for Operation Enduring Freedom. The combat zone tax exclusion applies to service in Afghanistan and the airspace above it. Servicemembers directly supporting operations in Afghanistan from other locations are also eligible if they are receiving imminent danger pay or hostile fire pay. As a result of the order, enlisted servicemembers and warrant officers will pay no federal income tax on all basic pay and special pay. Officers will pay tax only on that portion of their pay that exceeds the highest enlisted pay plus the $150 imminent danger pay, a figure currently set at $5,043.

Eligible servicemembers also receive an automatic extension to file their taxes.

Since the order is retroactive to Sept. 19, eligible servicemembers can expect a refund of taxes already paid and future withholding to stop.

Text of the President’s Afghanistan Combat Zone Executive Order:

Executive Order Designation of Afghanistan and the Airspace Above as a Combat Zone

Pursuant to the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 112 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 112), I designate, for purposes of that section, Afghanistan, including the airspace above, as an area in which Armed Forces of the United States are and have been engaged in combat.

For purposes of this order, I designate September 19, 2001, as the date of the commencement of combatant activities in such zone.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

December 12, 2001.

Table of Contents

ARTICLE 05 – Feedback: Readers React to Hackworth Columns

Supports Tax-free Status

I want to thank David Hackworth for his distinguished service to our nation and the cause of freedom worldwide. I am in full agreement with his article last week (“Silver Wings Upon Their Chests, Dec. 12), and would answer his final question concerning tax status [providing service personnel serving in Afghanistan] with a resounding yes!

I would go further: They should be tax exempt. Without their expertise and dedication to duty, we would surely endure the exponentially more costly wrath of a protracted war – much of it being waged against us in our own country. That said, the proposal unquestionably cost-justified as well as being overwhelmingly morally sound.

One good thing to come out of this fiery trial is a renewed respect for all our armed services and associated agencies that goes far beyond the patriotic pride which happily is rising once again in the breasts of our countrymen; far enough to ensure that no family of a service man or woman would ever again need to result to public assistance for sustenance.

--A Concerned Citizen

Marine Pride and Old Weapons

I was watching the coverage of the Marines at Camp Rhino and noticed that their equipment was the exact same stuff that I was using [in the Marine Corps] back in 1989-93. I heard that they had gotten a new machine gun in place of the M-60E-3, but I didn't see it during the TV coverage. In my whole time in the Corps, I can't recall fielding one piece of new equipment. We, as Marines take a strange sense of

pride about being successful with old equipment. It's that old spirit of being f**d all down the chain of command, but still determined to remain “Always Faithful.” We used to laugh about it, but as I watch other Marines in harm’s way, I am a little ticked off.

The Marines’ gung-ho spirit is sometimes their own weakness. They pump up their Marines, but fail to tell that, in a way, they are being f**d by being sent out with outdated gear. If they are America's “911 FORCE,” they need to be equipped like it. At least they should be armed with the same stuff as the 101st or the 10th Mountain Divisions. I know Special Forces, the Rangers and the 82nd Airborne get top-of-the-line gear.

--K.B.

Table of Contents

ARTICLE 06 – Feedback: Army Leadership Failures Are Not New

Having read David Hackworth’s column, “Let's Lock and Load Now” (DefenseWatch, Oct. 17), I could not agree more.

Let me I cite an incident which occurred during the Persian Gulf War. Our Army commo unit (Bravo Co. 34 Signal Bn. 93^rd Signal Bde.) had just deployed out from the docks to a log base to fit out and wait for orders. We were a main communications hub for VII Corps. We had drawn supplies and ammo prior to deploying and had picked up a weapon – the AT-4 anti-tank missiles – that no one in our unit – except myself and two other NCOs who were former 11Bs – were familiar with.

When I saw the crates of AT-4 anti-tank missiles, I asked my 1^st sergeant if I could get them out and start training the soldiers on how to fire them. He was literally appalled that I would make such a request. His response: “Look, sergeant, we are in the business of doing communications; we will never have to fire those weapons, and I plan on turning those missiles back in unopened once this war is finished.”

I couldn't believe what I was hearing! Not only were we forbidden to place a loaded magazine in our M-16s, nor could the M-203 gunners draw grenades, nor were the M-60 teams allowed to break down the ammunition between ball and tracer, nor were we issued hand grenades; now we could not train up on a new weapon that had been issued to us.

We received our orders to jump into the neutral zone in preparation of the VII Corps swing north then east … and we convoyed to the neutral zone. As I finished the duty roster for the team, two Hummers came screaming onto the site, one with a TOW launcher on top. The young lieutenant jumped into the back of my commo rig and asked if I were operations. I pointed the frantic lieutenant in the right direction, and he jumped from my rig to ops. Within a minute, my company commander called, telling me we had an Iraqi armor regiment headed in our direction, and that we needed to establish a perimeter immediately.

My first thought was to find that 1^st sergeant and give him a piece of my mind. Quickly, we started deploying the soldiers around the site, then I went and found the AT-4s. We had 30 missiles for 80 [Iraqi] armored vehicles. The company commander gave the order to prepare for evacuation.

A skeleton crew was designated to stay behind to cause a delaying action so that, (1) All communications rigs could be destroyed by thermite grenades, and (2) To give the main body time to get out of the area on a couple of 5-ton trucks.

I and the two other NCOs broke down the AT-4s and began issuing the missiles to those designated to stay, and gave each soldier an extremely short block of instruction on how to operate the weapon. I expected we would make five hits out of 30 at best. We knew we were going to be slaughtered. Those who did not have a missile, M203 grenade launcher, or members of an M60 team were instructed to evacuate once the Iraqis were sighted.

I remember it started to rain. The site where we were located was a small rise in a relatively flat area. With E-tools in hand, the soldiers began to dig in, but two to three inches down, hit solid rock. Now all we could do was move earth up in front of our positions.

I wanted to scream at the futility of the situation, but continued handing out AT-4s. Soldiers lay in cold, wet puddles. Our XO knew we didn't stand a chance and broke the standing order of radio silence to report that in the distance he could see vehicles moving in our direction. Two squadrons of Apache attack helicopters answered the call.

The accompanying OH-58s landed next to our site and received a sitrep from the XO, then lifted off in the direction that the lieutenant had reported the Iraqi movement. I

remember the 1^st sergeant walking around the perimeter giving his approval of our set-up. (I and the other two NCOs had set the whole thing up without guidance from him or the CO.

In the end, the Iraqi armored regiment turned around shortly after crossing into Saudi Arabia, the Apaches never did get the opportunity to engage, and our unit went about the business of communicating. The next day, the brigade sergeant-major stopped by the site to see how everyone was doing. I gave the CSM an earful.

After hearing my take on the situation, the company commander and 1^st sergeant were called into my rig while I was told to wait outside. We received AT-4 training that very next day. I figured that if anyone would understand where I was coming from, it would be my command sergeant-major, for he was a Vietnam veteran.

Col. Hackworth’s article struck a chord in me and brought back memories I had laid to rest. In 1996 I decided to ETS from the Army as the political environment was becoming too much to bear. My chain of command was more concerned with my soldiers making board appearances than they were about such basic things as weapons qualification or skill level 1 CTT qualification.

I believe his article has identified a problem that has existed for a very long time: the chain of command lacks trust in the soldier. How can a soldier be ready for a fight when the troop has his nose stuck in a “soldier of the month” manual? How can a soldier be ready to fight when he sees the M16 range only twice a year, or the M203 range once a year – and only for familiarization, not qualification?

Yes, peace does come at a price, but why should that price be the life of an American soldier because he wasn't trained correctly? I hope the military leadership will address this problem and seek out the money needed to keep soldiers current in their combat readiness. When the time comes, everyone is a rifleman. I just hope they know how to use the weapon effectively.

--A.K., USA (Ret.)

Table of Contents

ARTICLE 07 – Future Limits in Human Intelligence Collection

Second of Four Parts

By J. David Galland

The experience gained by the United States and its intelligence community over the past 50 years has prepared us well to identify the problems and limitations we will be facing in the field in the coming decades ahead.

The United States is, in fact, already facing these limiting parameters and conditions and they are expected to become more serious and more complex as we proceed well into the new millennium.

The anticipated problems that the intelligence community expects to face in the realm of clandestine human collection are many. What is arguably one of the most serious encumbrances to mission accomplishment is the changing foreign perceptions of U. S. capabilities and intentions. The reader may find this hard to believe, given the many years of military and intelligence cooperation with the former West Germany, but in today's Germany, intelligence collection by the United States is considered a hostile act if collected on German soil.

This is a diametrically opposed position to the fertile collection environment and bi-lateral operations, which were to prevalent in West Germany only twelve years ago, by many counties allied with The Bundesrepublik Deutschland, more commonly known as West Germany.

Given the popularity of the many Hollywood renditions of espionage stories notwithstanding, it is rare to have an intelligence source who enters into and continues in that role for reasons of venality. Material considerations do, naturally, constitute an established form of motivation for many intelligence sources. However, since these sources are human, their motivations are normally complex and frequently extremely so.

For example, an 82-year-old source, released from Poland in 1988, to travel to the West, became a bountiful source with a long-term quality intelligence "take." He was motivated because over the years, as he worked as a medical researcher in Poland, he and his colleagues were poisoned by KGB medical teams. The KGB teams had concealed deadly levels of mercury in his laboratory to measure the long term, highly elevated exposure of humans, and the resultant medical complications.

A source who considers himself an employee or appendage of his home country's government, may feel compelled to become a U.S. intelligence agent primarily by idealism, genuine or rationalized. The source, or potential source, may be acting chiefly on the strength of such a basically emotional stimuli as despair over the policies and actions of his own government. Or, it may be the internal situation in his country or bitter resentment at what the source perceives to be his unjust treatment by his employer.

The source may, without the knowledge or the consent of his employer, view his assumption of his ascribed role of a U. S. intelligence source as the most available and logical means of communicating the plans of his government to well placed officials in the U.S. government. Without official sanction of his government, this source acts to ensure that the United States both comprehends what his government is doing and in so doing, ensures U. S. support of his own country's positions and policies. Whatever the source's motivation, however, his perception of U. S. defense capabilities and/or governmental policy intentions will, almost exclusively, not be the critical operative factor or impetus particularly in the case of the source who is motivated by genuine idealism.

Another contemporary example might concern a source in the Middle East. This source may vehemently deplore what he construes as a one-sided U. S. support for Israel. In fact, the source may have a bitter hatred for the United States because what he perceives to be one-sidedness by the United States on the Arab-Israeli conflicts. However the source may also grudgingly view the United States as the only government that has the influential capability to bring this long-term discontent to a solution since it is the only country in the world that can exert leverage on Israel to accept compromises which Arabs consider absolute prerequisites to any potential peace.

In a somewhat narrower Arab-Israeli context, a functionary of a Palestinian national organization might well be motivated to accept or even actively seek the role of a human source for U. S. intelligence (USI) and not only for the aforementioned reasons. However, because of the strong desire of Palestinians to have the United States accept, embrace, and recognize Palestinian nationality and eventually, a Palestinian state, the functionary’s motivations may be considered well founded and worthy of maturing in the role as a USI source.

Situations such as the Arab-Israeli conflicts or the levels of Russian current or previous expansionism, or perceived American expansionism and aggression, generate their own particular forms of motivations in the minds of potential human collection sources. Note that foreign perceptions of U. S. defense capabilities and policy intentions will always constitute important positive, or negative, motivational factors. Certainly not to legitimize Osama Bin Laden's views or beliefs, however, it is obvious that a person who is driven to incomprehensible extremes must, in his mind, have important motivational factors, in spite of an apparent clouded thought process.

Whatever his background or nationality, a potential source [delete: is a citizen or functionary of a friendly, neutral, or hostile foreign country], if he is sane, is almost surely bound to ask himself how relevant will his covert collaboration with USI be to the larger purposes he seeks to serve. The potential source's perception, that if the U. S. is neither willing or able to act decisively to protect its national interests in the area of his concern it is likely he will be unwilling to undertake the personal inconvenience and risk that the role of a covert human source may inevitably entail.

Perceptions abroad of U. S. capabilities and intentions tend to be rather widely shared among both pro- and anti-American elements in a given country of focus. If this general perception is that the United States is a proverbial paper tiger, it will impede our human intelligence collection effort and just as surely, will favor the human collection efforts of our adversaries.

J. David Galland, Deputy Editor of DefenseWatch, is the pen name of a career U.S. Army senior Non-Commissioned Officer currently serving in Germany. He can be reached at defensewatch02@yahoo.com

Table of Contents

ARTICLE 08 – A Janitor's 10 Lessons in Leadership

By Col. James Moschgat USAF

William “Bill” Crawford certainly was an unimpressive figure, one you could easily overlook during a hectic day at the U.S. Air Force Academy. Mr. Crawford, as most of us referred to him back in the late 1970s, was our squadron janitor.

While we cadets busied ourselves preparing for academic exams, athletic events, Saturday morning parades and room inspections, or never-ending leadership classes, Bill quietly moved about the squadron mopping and buffing floors, emptying trash cans, cleaning toilets, or just tidying up the mess 100 college-age kids can leave in a dormitory.

Sadly, and for many years, few of us gave him much notice, rendering little more than a passing nod or throwing a curt, “G'morning!” in his direction as we hurried off to our daily duties.

Why? Perhaps it was because of the way he did his job – he always kept the squadron area spotlessly clean, even the toilets and showers gleamed. Frankly, he did his job so well, none of us had to notice or get involved. After all, cleaning toilets was his job, not ours.

Maybe it was his physical appearance that made him disappear into the background. Bill didn't move very quickly and, in fact, you could say he even shuffled a bit, as if he suffered from some sort of injury. His gray hair and wrinkled face made him appear ancient to a group of young cadets. And his crooked smile, well, it looked a little funny. Face it, Bill was an old man working in a young person's world. What did he have to offer us on a personal level?

Finally, maybe it was Mr. Crawford's personality that rendered him almost invisible to the young people around him. Bill was shy, almost painfully so. He seldom spoke to a cadet unless they addressed him first, and that didn't happen very often. Our janitor always buried himself in his work, moving about with stooped shoulders, a quiet gait, and an averted gaze. If he noticed the hustle and bustle of cadet life around him, it was hard to tell.

So, for whatever reason, Bill blended into the woodwork and became just another fixture around the squadron. The Academy, one of our nation's premier leadership laboratories, kept us busy from dawn till dusk. And Mr.Crawford ... well, he was just a janitor.

That changed one fall Saturday afternoon in 1976. I was reading a book about World War II and the tough Allied ground campaign in Italy, when I stumbled across an incredible story. On Sept. 13, 1943, a Private William Crawford from Colorado, assigned to the 36th Infantry Division, had been involved in some bloody fighting on Hill 424 near Altavilla, Italy.

The words on the page leapt out at me: “In the face of intense and overwhelming hostile fire ... with no regard for personal safety ... on his own initiative, Private Crawford single-handedly attacked fortified enemy positions.” It continued, “for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at risk of life above and beyond the call of duty, the President of the United States ... ”

”Holy cow,” I said to my roommate, “you're not going to believe this, but I think our janitor is a Medal of Honor winner.” We all knew Mr. Crawford was a WW II Army vet, but that didn't keep my friend from looking at me as if I was some sort of alien being. Nonetheless, we couldn't wait to ask Bill about the story on Monday.

We met Mr. Crawford bright and early Monday and showed him the page in question from the book, anticipation and doubt on our faces. He starred at it for a few silent moments and then quietly uttered something like, “Yep, that's me.”

Mouths agape, my roommate and I looked at one another, then at the book, and
quickly back at our janitor. Almost at once we both stuttered, “Why didn't you ever tell us about it?”

He slowly replied after some thought, “That was one day in my life and it happened a long time ago.”

I guess we were all at a loss for words after that. We had to hurry off to class and Bill, well, he had chores to attend to. However, after that brief exchange, things were never again the same around our squadron. Word spread like wildfire among the cadets that we had a hero in our midst – Mr. Crawford, our janitor, had won the Medal!

Cadets who had once passed by Bill with hardly a glance, now greeted him with a smile and a respectful, “Good morning, Mr. Crawford.” Those who had before left a mess for the “janitor” to clean up started taking it upon themselves to put things in order. Most cadets routinely stopped to talk to Bill throughout the day and we even began inviting him to our formal squadron functions. He'd show up dressed in a conservative dark suit and quietly talk to those who approached him, the only sign of his heroics being a simple blue, star-spangled lapel pin.

Almost overnight, Bill went from being a simple fixture in our squadron to one of our teammates.

Mr. Crawford changed too, but you had to look closely to notice the difference. After that fall day in 1976, he seemed to move with more purpose, his shoulders didn't seem to be as stooped, he met our greetings with a direct gaze and a stronger “good morning” in return, and he flashed his crooked smile more often.

The squadron gleamed as always, but everyone now seemed to notice it more. Bill even got to know most of us by our first names, something that didn't happen often at the Academy. While no one ever formally acknowledged the change, I think we became Bill's cadets and his squadron.

As often happens in life, events sweep us away from those in our past. The last time I saw Bill was on graduation day in June 1977. As I walked out of the squadron for the last time, he shook my hand and simply said, “Good luck, young man.” With that, I embarked on a career that has been truly lucky and blessed.

Mr. Crawford continued to work at the Academy and eventually retired in his native Colorado, one of four Medal of Honor winners living in a small town.

A wise person once said, “It's not life that's important, but those you meet along the way that make the difference.” Bill was one who made a difference for me. Bill Crawford, our janitor, taught me many valuable, unforgettable leadership lessons. Here are ten I'd like to share with you.

1. Be Cautious of Labels: Labels you place on people may define your relationship to them and bound their potential. Sadly, and for a long time, we labeled Bill as just a janitor, but he was so much more. Therefore, be cautious of a leader who callously says, “Hey, he's just an Airman.” Likewise, don't tolerate the O-1, who says, “I can't do that, I'm just a lieutenant.”

2. Everyone Deserves Respect: Because we hung the “janitor” label on Mr. Crawford, we often wrongly treated him with less respect than others around us. He deserved much more, and not just because he was a Medal of Honor winner. Bill deserved respect because he was a janitor, walked among us, and was a part of our team.

3. Courtesy Makes a Difference: Be courteous to all around you, regardless of rank or position. Military customs, as well as common courtesies, help bond a team. When our daily words to Mr. Crawford turned from perfunctory “hellos” to heartfelt greetings, his demeanor and personality outwardly changed. It made a difference for all of us.

4. Take Time to Know Your People: Life in the military is hectic, but that's no excuse for not knowing the people you work for and with. For years, a hero walked among us at the Academy and we never knew it. Who are the heroes that walk in your midst?

5. Anyone Can Be a Hero: Mr. Crawford certainly didn't fit anyone's standard definition of a hero. Moreover, he was just a private on the day he won his Medal. Don't sell your people short, for any one of them may be the hero who rises to the occasion when duty calls. On the other hand, it's easy to turn to your proven performers when the chips are down, but don't ignore the rest of the team. Today's rookie could and should be tomorrow's superstar.

6. Leaders Should Be Humble: Most modern day heroes and some leaders are anything but humble, especially if you calibrate your “hero meter” on today's athletic fields. End zone celebrations and self-aggrandizement are what we've come to expect from sports greats. Not Mr. Crawford. He was too busy working to celebrate his past heroics. Leaders would be well-served to do the same.

7. Life Won't Always Hand You What You Think You Deserve: We in the military work hard and, dang it, we deserve recognition, right? However, sometimes you just have to persevere, even when accolades don't come your way. Perhaps you weren't Nominated for junior officer or airman of the quarter as you thought you should – don't let that stop you.

8. Don't pursue glory: pursue excellence: Private Bill Crawford didn't pursue glory; he did his duty and then swept floors for a living. No Job is Beneath a leader. If Bill Crawford, a Medal of Honor winner, could clean latrines and smile, is there a job beneath your dignity? Think about it.

9. Pursue Excellence: No matter what task life hands you, do it well. Dr. Martin Luther King said, “If life makes you a street sweeper, be the best street sweeper you can be.” Mr. Crawford modeled that philosophy and helped make our dormitory area a home.

10. Life is a Leadership Laboratory: All too often we look to some school or PME class to teach us about leadership when, in fact, life is a leadership laboratory. Those you meet every day will teach you enduring lessons if you just take time to stop, look and listen. I spent four years at the Air Force Academy, took dozens of classes, read hundreds of books, and met thousands of great people. I gleaned leadership skills from all of them, but one of the people I remember most is Mr. Bill Crawford and the lessons he unknowingly taught. Don't miss your opportunity to learn.

Bill Crawford was a janitor. However, he was also a teacher, friend, role model and one great American hero. Thanks, Mr. Crawford, for some valuable leadership lessons.

Col. Moschgat, commander of the 12th Operations Group at Randolph AFB, Tex., is a 1977 graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy. This article originally appeared in Wingspread, the Randolph base newspaper and is reprinted with permission. Bill Crawford passed away on Mar. 15, 2000. He is the only Medal of Honor recipient buried at the U.S. Air Force Academy cemetery.

Table of Contents

ARTICLE 09 – Medal of Honor Recipient – CRAWFORD, WILLIAM J., Pvt. USA

Rank and organization: Private, U.S. Army, 36th Infantry Division.

Place and date: Near Altavilla, Italy, 13 September 1943.

Entered service at: Pueblo, Colo.

Birth: Pueblo, Colo.

G.O. No.: 57, 20 July 1944.

Citation: For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at risk of life above and beyond the call of duty in action with the enemy near Altavilla, Italy, 13 September 1943. When Company I attacked an enemy-held position on Hill 424, the 3d Platoon, in which Pvt. Crawford was a squad scout, attacked as base platoon for the company.

After reaching the crest of the hill, the platoon was pinned down by intense enemy machine-gun and small-arms fire. Locating one of these guns, which was dug in on a terrace on his immediate front, Pvt. Crawford, without orders and on his own initiative, moved over the hill under enemy fire to a point within a few yards of the gun emplacement and single-handedly destroyed the machinegun and killed three of the crew with a hand grenade, thus enabling his platoon to continue its advance.

When the platoon, after reaching the crest, was once more delayed by enemy fire, Pvt. Crawford again, in the face of intense fire, advanced directly to the front midway between two hostile machinegun nests located on a higher terrace and emplaced in a small ravine. Moving first to the left, with a hand grenade he destroyed one gun emplacement and killed the crew; he then worked his way, under continuous fire, to the other and with one grenade and the use of his rifle, killed one enemy and forced the remainder to flee. Seizing the enemy machinegun, he fired on the withdrawing Germans and facilitated his company's advance.

Editor’s Note: If you know of any MOH recipient who is hospitalized or has passed away recently, please email DefenseWatch Deputy Editor J. David Galland at defensewatch02@yahoo.com

Table of Contents

EDITOR'S NOTE: Your Support is Important!

Footnote: The ultimate success in reviving and expanding SFTT depends on everyone. We need your financial contributions to continue our operation. While any amount is welcome, we suggest a $30 annual contribution from each member will enable us to succeed.

The IRS recognizes SFTT as a 501(c)3 Non-Profit Educational Foundation (IRS EIN 31-1592564).

Donations are tax deductible. Send us some moral support and encouragement to help in the struggle to improve combat readiness. Every little contribution helps. Mail your checks to:

Soldiers For The Truth Foundation

P.O. Box 11179

Greenwich CT 06831

Table of Contents

EDITOR'S NOTE: Article Submission Procedures/Subject Editors Sought

1. Try to keep articles to 750 words or less. SUBMIT IN MS WORD FORMAT, if possible!

2. Submit your piece to one of the following editors:

Ed Offley, Editor

defensewatch@aol.com

J. David Galland, Deputy Editor

defensewatch02@yahoo.com

DefenseWatch is looking for volunteer subject editors willing to assist in screening and editing article submissions. We are looking for experts in the following areas: U.S. Army, U.S. Coast Guard, Special Operations forces/counter-terrorism, weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and veterans affairs. If interested in joining the DefenseWatch team, please contact Ed Offley at defensewatch@aol.com.

Table of Contents

GLOSSARY OF MILITARY ACRONYMS:

We've had numerous requests from troops in different branches of the military to establish this link so that we will all know how "all you others" talk that talk. The DoD site is not working but the nonprofit Federation of American Scientists has an excellent online acronym roster. Please see below:

http://www.fas.org/news/reference/lexicon/acronym.htm

Table of Contents

HACK BOOK SALES

Hack's books, About Face, Hazardous Duty, The Price of Honor and The
Vietnam Primer can be found at www.hackworth.com. They make a great addition
to any library. Hack is offering them at a special SFTT price.

Subscribe/Unsubscribe - Make Changes to your E-mail addresses:

An Automated Subscription Manager is Online at URL: (Coming soon)

Manual E-mail Subscriptions See Instructions below

To SUBSCRIBE to SFTT-News - Send e-mail to (Coming soon)

Enter [ subscribe sftt-news ] in the body of the message. No subject is required.

To UNSUBSCRIBE from SFTT-News - Send e-mail to (Coming soon)

Enter [ unsubscribe sftt-news ] in the body of the message. No subject is required.

For help or questions with the mailing list send to (Coming soon)

For help or suggestions on the new SFTT web, send e-mail to (Coming soon)